Who approved Matthews as spokesperson? I thought we were rather clear at the last conclave that any race-wide talking head should be young, attractive, preferably female, and focus on things like "Spaceships: You're Welcome!" and "Lactose Tolerance: What Northern Ancestry Can Do For YOU!" instead of this glum animosity crap.

You see, black people, this is how white people are organized. We collectively make decisions because each of us is responsible for the actions and decisions for all of us.

I can't tell you how many times I have asked "how come the black people don't say anything when a black guy beats up a white guy?" You need to collectively formulate a response. I am expecting an apology in triplicate, signed and dated by the blacks. I expect the same thing from all of the Muslims for what happened in Boston.

In addition, a weekly march titled "We Suck. Sorry" should be conducted. You've marched 10,000 times for Trayvon. How about a march for that time a black guy shot a white guy?

I believe the problem is one of organization. I suggest you hold more meetings to get your members aware of the tasks they need to accomplish. You at least need better processes. White people are certified ISO 9000.

I once read a book written by Chris Matthews. I figured that a guy with his experience dealing one-on-one with famous and powerful politicians and other influential figures over a period of decades would have some interesting stories to tell. Stories that he'd rather not discuss on the air.

It was so utterly vapid, pointless, poorly written and devoid of interest that I wasn't entirely sure it wasn't parody.

If you're going to be speaking for yourself, I suggest you learn the difference between "your" and "you're." Otherwise, listeners will presume that your sloppy use of language coincides with sloppy thinking.

The funny parts is that "NewsBusters" and its parent "Media Research Center" would be collectively slamming brown people (especially Muslims, since they're all brown, right?) for not condemning some single act by some deranged Muslim somewhere. They're only upset when the logic they use towards others is somehow adopted by Whites.

BMulligan:I suggest you learn the difference between "your" and "you're."

Thanks, I saw that mistake after I posted. You should also chastise me for not using the always available preview function.And thank you for helping me to realize what people will or might possibly be thinking about me because my sloppiness in written language.You really should wear tights and a cape, maybe with a big "G" on your chest for grammar. Then again, maybe you do.

As for myself, maybe I have a fine mind and a good heart. Maybe I don't. I like to think I do, but that's for others to judge.

I believe everyone's due a certain base level of respect and good manners upon first meeting, so I give everyone that. I try to speak and act with the knowledge that I don't *know* anyone else's history and experiences, because one thing I *do* know is that if I whitemansplain to someone that the world works a certain way when they probably know for a fact that the world most certainly works some other way, I'll rightly be judged an arrogant idiot. I don't worry about making faux pas, if they have good hearts and fine minds they'll a.) let it slide and b.) I'll probably learn something interesting and I'll know enough not to make it again.

This strategy seems to work pretty well.

I've assumed for the last few decades that if I go around apologizing for all my fellow white people all the time, people will judge me to be a patronizing twit. The only white person I can really represent is myself.

Tyee:BMulligan: I suggest you learn the difference between "your" and "you're."

Thanks, I saw that mistake after I posted. You should also chastise me for not using the always available preview function.And thank you for helping me to realize what people will or might possibly be thinking about me because my sloppiness in written language.You really should wear tights and a cape, maybe with a big "G" on your chest for grammar. Then again, maybe you do.

As for myself, maybe I have a fine mind and a good heart. Maybe I don't. I like to think I do, but that's for others to judge.

I believe everyone's due a certain base level of respect and good manners upon first meeting, so I give everyone that. I try to speak and act with the knowledge that I don't *know* anyone else's history and experiences, because one thing I *do* know is that if I whitemansplain to someone that the world works a certain way when they probably know for a fact that the world most certainly works some other way, I'll rightly be judged an arrogant idiot. I don't worry about making faux pas, if they have good hearts and fine minds they'll a.) let it slide and b.) I'll probably learn something interesting and I'll know enough not to make it again.

This strategy seems to work pretty well.

I've assumed for the last few decades that if I go around apologizing for all my fellow white people all the time, people will judge me to be a patronizing twit. The only white person I can really represent is myself.

If you consult the Procedures for the Issuance of Collective Response (TPS323), it clearly states in Section 15 that when one white person speaks all white people are speaking. When you pull crap like this you get situations where Bill Cosby says one thing and Al Sharpton says another. When that happens the message gets muddled and no one knows what to think.

I can sort of understand the impetus behind it (gaining perspective and empathy and whatnot), but that still seems a bit bizarre. It reminded me of an incident several years ago, in which Colonial Williamsburg decided to hold a reenactment of a slave auction. Certain members of the black community were up in arms (as well as some whites), saying that it was a tawdry bit of exploitation for tourist cash.

The detractors were all invited to attend and monitor the event, and they all walked away with minds changed; apparently the performers pulled no punches in the reenactment, and showed it for the horror it was. As I recall, a good number of the audience were weeping while watching it, and gained a bit of new-found understanding. A much better approach if you ask me.

I can sort of understand the impetus behind it (gaining perspective and empathy and whatnot), but that still seems a bit bizarre. It reminded me of an incident several years ago, in which Colonial Williamsburg decided to hold a reenactment of a slave auction. Certain members of the black community were up in arms (as well as some whites), saying that it was a tawdry bit of exploitation for tourist cash.

The detractors were all invited to attend and monitor the event, and they all walked away with minds changed; apparently the performers pulled no punches in the reenactment, and showed it for the horror it was. As I recall, a good number of the audience were weeping while watching it, and gained a bit of new-found understanding. A much better approach if you ask me.

Don't you dare give thoughtful and reasoned reactions on the internet.

Johnny_Whistle:captmingus: On behalf of the more than 50% of white Americans whose ancestors arrived in the US after the civil war I wish to thank you Mr Mathews!.....still don't feel a lick of guilt though

Because, as we all know, the civil war signaled THE END OF ALL RACISM, BIGOTRY, AND OPPRESSION.

Rann Xerox:1. Build a spaceship.2. Tie Chris Matthews and Bill O'Reilly into the cockpit seats with ballgags on their faces.3. Set the controls for the heart of the sun.4. The whole f*cking planet profits!